This morning, I sent this message to the Pollina campaign in response to their new donor ask on the basis of his announcement yesterday:

Dear Meg,

Frankly, I was disappointed that Anthony Pollina did not show some courage and leadership to resolve a political quagmire that seems likely to bring us a Douglas-Dubie State House for the foreseeable future.

I am un-subscribing to your newsletters, because I am losing faith that Pollina wants to be more than just another politician, taking more vague swipes at his opponents than declarations of new ideas, that I know he could use such public forums to push into the headlines.

I could regain my confidence in him — and would indeed become a donor to him for the first time ever — under two possible scenarios (now that he has refused to take on the still uncontested Lt. Gov. race).  One is that he run, as no less of a Progressive, but in the Democratic primary.  If he believes he is the better opponent for Douglas, why not give everyone who most wants to unseat the governor the chance to make that judgment.  Until we can get IRV in VT (which I strongly support, but it will take a new governor), a 3-way general is not the way to go.  Resolve these differences in a primary, and I will definitely be there for Pollina, with bells on.

The other avenue, though less preferable, would be to start running as an ally of Gaye Symington.  I’m hardly one of her fans, but they are both running against an incumbent.  In political reality, the center-left controls the legislature and the only way a 3-way race will unseat Douglas, whose faction is smaller but undivided, will be to put it in their hands.  If Pollina and Symington run as a tag-team, agreeing to endorse the other if they take the highest vote tally, I would also regain my enthusiasm for a Pollina candidacy.

Until this happens, I am disappointed and sorry to say that I can no longer support you.

Sincerely,

Tim Wolfe

I have to give Meg credit, given the content of my letter, that she wrote back.  Reprinted with permission:

Dear Tim,

Thank you for your honest comments. I am really sorry to hear you are removing your support. As much as the ideas you present are really good there are so many negatives to them that I don’t see them as viable options.

I would totally support a world and political system free of these games but that isn’t the world we live in. IRV is central and as you know an issue Progressives have long supported and promoted. The problem with running for Lt. Gov is that the discussion was not serious enough to ensure we would not change races and then still find ourselves in a 3 way race.

With regard to doing that and to running in the Democratic primary, while they may get votes the chance of people just promoting Anthony as an opportunistic person who will change parties or offices at whim to try and win an election is much greater and the damage would be to the credibility of the candidate and the campaign. I am open to any ideas you have and we do discuss them.

Peace,

Meg

( – promoted by odum)

Amid our national primary obsession, and more pressing issues closer to home, this little statehouse accomplishment might easily be missed: the House last Friday passed a bill (which the Senate passed back in March) approving Vermont’s participation in a national grassroots effort to sideline the Electoral College.

If you aren’t already familiar with this effort, it stems from the Constitutional provision that each state gets to assign its electors as it sees fit.  Therefore, if we want to give them to the popular vote winner, we can; this initiative is to get enough states — ie, representing a majority in the EC — to agree to do this, with the contingency that it won’t go into effect until that critical threshold is reached.

At this point, IL, MD, and NJ have already signed on (which means we’re already 1/6 of the way to the goal) and Vermont could become state #4… if Douglas is willing to sign it.  Does anybody have any word on whether he’s likely to?  Or what would influence him — and what do you think the partisan effects of this might be?  After all, we may very well be seeing this experiment tried out as early as 2012…

Just to highlight one (less-mentioned) positive aspect of a popular vote: right now, states with the lowest registration rates and turnout have a disproportionate power.  As the 2004 data shows, Vermont has a higher turnout than the national average… in fact, we’re ranked #12!